John Gomperts, an attorney in Washington, D.C., provides an historical overview of the change from indeterminate sentencing to determinate sentencing under sentencing guidelines, noting the diverse structures for guidelines among the States. Jon Wilcox, chief judge of Wisconsin's 6th judicial district, profiles that State's sentencing-guidelines structure. Under this system, judges have the discretion to depart from the guidelines, but they must comply with the format of using a sentencing-guidelines scoring sheet to explain why they departed from the guidelines. There is no appellate review of these departures. With the passage of time, judges' compliance with the guidelines has increased. Rosselle Pekelis, judge of the Court of Appeals in Washington State, portrays that State's sentencing guidelines structure. It is based in a sentencing matrix that focuses on offense seriousness and the offender's criminal history. The system provides for guidelines departures due to aggravating and mitigating circumstances. Such departures undergo appellate review. Robert Collier, Jr., a North Carolina Superior Court judge, explains that State's guidelines system, which was devised by the legislature. It allows for exceptions to the guidelines that maintain judicial discretion. Correctional discretion regarding release is also maintained, effectively undermining the intent of sentencing guidelines, according to Judge Collier. Audience questions and comments focus on prosecutorial discretion and the maintenance of judicial discretion.